poppycock

Am I missing something here?
A story in the current issue of Red Pepper describes how the "war" on Afghanistan's poppy production is floundering.
The economy there is so poor that many farmers have no choice but to grow the crop if they want to eat and educate their children.
Afghan poppies account for 90 per cent of Britain's street heroin and - says today's Guardian - the Taliban have moved in on the trade.
None of that's really anything new. Yet a couple of days ago, the Daily Mail described how British farmers were turning to poppy cultivation, to "tackle the NHS morphine crisis."
I'm sorry, but to me this doesn't quite stack up.
Afghanistan is one of world's most impoverished countries and poppies are perfectly suited to its conditions. We are occupying the country and are meant to be reconstructing it, bringing in investment and generally making things better.
I understand that it's unstable there. But there must be some way of buying the farmers' poppies, giving them a fair price, and using them for the NHS, surely? Isn't that what free trade and world markets are supposed to be all about? Letting countries trade themselves into a better situation?
It would tick some overseas development boxes while helping to sort out a problem back home. I find it utterly bizarre that this doesn't seem to be happening.